The Fw190 vs Spit V article you just posted has been discredited as a source for your claims on this very board in the past. You have a lot of gumption and intellectual dishonesty to try to foist it again.
-And it has been discredited in what way exactly?
As for the extent of my assertion about the effect of the upper disc half thrust increase relative to the bottom half (which has been described and accepted here by at least one poster), one aspect I think is worth emphasizing is the following: This is equivalent to having the prop's center of thrust move UP, and this upward movement creates a lever, however small: My assertion is that this effect is a heavy burden on the wing load because the propeller blade is at 90° to the fuselage, and this creates an unsupported STRESS-RISER that multiplies the effect that would seem modest otherwise.
I think this effect is of sufficient magnitude to allow a FW-190A to out-sustain turns a Spitfire V if the Spitfire is putting out 1400-1500 HP and the FW-190A is downtthrottled to say 900 hp (Of course an equally downthrottled Spit would win). Now would the FW-190A not slow down so much as to reduce its turn rate MORE than its turn radius? Maybe a frontally "denser" aircraft, in weight-to-drag ratio, loses less speed in a turn and thus needs less power to sustain a sufficient velocity?
Whatever the case may be, the Johnny Johnson account is perfectly clear as to what is going on, and benefits from the hindsight of being post-war from one of the Allies top aces. He states clearly in the opening paragraph: "The FW-190A turned better than the Me-109", in agreement with the overwhelming majority of Western and Eastern combat pilots...
I think the path of the FW-190A's instantaneous turn performance is a step in the wrong direction: This aircraft did not like being pulled suddenly, and shined more in the sustained turns that were more typical of European air combat than is today generally accepted in simmer circles...
I think for the math to be accurate for sustained turns, it has to take into account that some aircraft benefit more from downthrottling than others. Keep in mind that according to Fin ace Karhila, the peak sustained turn rate of the Me-109G-6 is found, by heavily DOWNTHROTTLING as underlined by him, as low as 160 MPH... That is extremely low, and does not speak well for the general sustained turning ability of this aircraft, though at these extreme low speeds the light wingloading does allow it to compete by a smaller radius which does gives some lead to fire even without gaining in turn rate...
That the prop disc thrust load has a major burden effect on the wing's load can be clearly seen in this account for the reasons outlined below:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/combat-reports/339-hanseman-24may44.jpg Quote (after numerous 360°s at 500 ft.):"He began to turn inside me. Then he stopped cutting me off as I cut throttle"
"Cutting throttle" here went on for SEVERAL 360s: "GRADUALLY I worked the Me-109 away from the airfield" "Everytime I got near the airdrome they opened fire with light AA fire"... Then, MORE cutting of throttle produced MORE gaining: "and commenced turning inside him AS I decreased throttle setting"
The AS in the last sentence is especially significant here: It means there was no deceleration lag from cutting the throttle to reach a better lower speed: Cutting the throttle IMMEDIATELY sharpened the sustained turn, and did so in a SUSTAINED way that lasted through a large numbers of 360°s...
I think the right-angle stress-riser of the prop blade/spinner junction, from the leverage created by the shifting prop center of thrust described by PJ_Godzilla, is the overlooked factor here. It is not a small burden because of that right-angle leverage...
Any math that cannot discern propeller traction from jet propulsion is obviously inadequate, and not any kind of a source of reliable information for propeller aircraft performance in this case.
Those math predictions do seem to predict the miserable turn performance for the FW-190A, but are accurate only above 250 MPH, which is low enough a treshold to make for some misleading sustained turn tests at full power...
An actual FW-190A-8 Western ace said on this board that the FIRST thing he did BEFORE the merge (with P-51Ds!) was to downthrottle, pop the flaps and prepare for tight slow turns...
Gaston
